Is this a good answer to my biology assignment?

Question

1) If an unlimited supply of organs were available, should a set of criteria be applied to all transplant recipients?

ANSWER:

) I believe that criteria should apply even if organs were available to all recipients. Transplanting organs costs a lot of money, and to have people pay high taxes for someone who may die even with a new heart in a few years would be pointless and costly. If a person does not consider their life worth making a few lifestyle changes, I don’t think that they deserve a new organ. My criteria would be that if you can afford to transplant and maintain an organ, have people depending on you, and have a healthy lifestyle you should get a new organ. If you can’t afford an organ, you can’t expect the taxpayers to pay for it unless you have people depending on you to live and are healthy.

Answer 1

Sounds pretty good.  I'd maybe add an example of someone who needed a liver transplant because he was an alcoholic, but refused to stop drinking.  Someone like that would just waste liver after liver.

Answer 2

sounds great